Corks longest ‘barren’ spell....?

Road-Hog wrote: »

It will be 14 years this sept since corks last hurling title. Can anyone out there clarify if this is their longest period without a title....? Also since 1990 they have had 4 titles in 29 years.......compared to kk’s 10/11 in same period......are we in for a period of rebel dominance in the coming decade....?

1903 to 1919 is the longest run without an All Ireland for Cork, won at least 1 every decade bar the 1880s. Only Tipp have gone one better on that front. Tbf, take Kk out of the last time period and its pretty even between counties.

Davys Fits wrote: »

So If they dont win this year it will be the first decade since the 1880's that cork failed to win a title.

They probably won't be far off again this year but it's hard to have confidence in them. Just hard to see them winning a tight championship game going down the straight. Still I think they 'll have the know how to come out of Munster again.

I'm not from Clare or Cork, and not a fan of either County. I'm also not a fan of Gavin's refereeing style but on that day, I think neither team can complain too much with the result.

Cork supporters are still furious over that, but you can't take one incident in isolation. Clare had plenty to be unhappy about that day too. I think had Cork won it, Clare would be just as furious afterwards. The ref played 40 seconds on top of the "at least 2 minutes" of extra time.. which is not extraordinary - I would say even common. The ref is perfectly entitled to add on time for play ( deliberate or otherwise ) that holds up play, and he can add it on above and beyond the advertised minimum extra time. Cork were trying to kill the play and Gavin is perfectly entitled to compensate for that. This is written in the rules.

Also, Shane O'Neill could have got a red card and Clare fans would argue that he should have definitely walked. Hoggy was given a free when Mcgloughlin was clearly barging..


Here's the shane o'neill incident. A clear red card.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=22&v=sbZOJUakXDw

They had a barren spell in hurling from All Ireland victories in 1954 (third in a row) to 1966.
This happened during phase when Tipperary were outrageously good and Cork just couldn't get past them. At the time, Cork hurling was dominated by the big three city clubs and the presence of Christy Ring.
In 1966 they discarded all the older players, picked nine u21s (totally unheard of at that time) and stuffed a solid Kilkenny in an All Ireland final. Cork went on to win 4 in a row u21s and a host of minor titles in a very competitive era.

willietherock wrote: »

For a lad not from Clare you sure have some memory of every perceived injustice that happened 6 years ago.
As for SO'N's clear red do you not think the CLare lad who gave as good as he got right in front of two umpires would have deserved the same

The first reference to 2013 here is in post 5, not from puzi who simply responded to it. Your own memory of 2013 doesn't seem to be too bad.

puzl wrote: »

The clare lad did not strike to the head with a hurley in anger.

As I said, I think a draw was a fair result that day.

I'm not sure why you think only people from Clare have good memories though... but I remember the barging incident, the strike to the head and the 40 seconds of stoppage time played because I live in Cork and I've had to listen to them whinge about it constantly for 6 years.

Given O'Neills reaction it was pretty obvious with delicate part of his midrift was struck. Two umpires 2 yards from the incident with perfect views held both equally culpable.

@Puzl- you're talking out your hat. I recall the game given the level of excitement and the referee didn't have any particular influence, positive or negative for either team barring the last minute. There was no justification for adding the time on and it appears it was done for the sole reason (in classic GAA fashion) of allowing Clare a chance to level up, which they duly did.

Referees can have an influence on games, causing team's to win or draw in an unfair fashion. This happened that day, to the benefit of Clare.

I only brought it up as a topical point to note this wouldn't have been Cork's longest barren spell if they had had a fair crack of the whip that day- I didn't really plan on debating with someone who is definitely not from Clare about the ins and outs of the whole final.

BloodyBill wrote: »

If Cork had beaten Clare the first day it would have been daylight robbery. The ref played a minute over. The Cork guy who took the sideline before the equaliser was who cost Cork that victory not the ref. The Ref has discretion on time allowed. The board only shows the minimum to be played. Anyway Cork had a clean slate in the replay and got well beaten.
Incidentally this year I see Cork getting to an All Ireland final if they beat Tipp first day out in Munster.

Nonsense, the referee cost Cork the victory, not the lad who took the sideline or anyone else. here was no reason to play any extra time. There would have been no replay if the first game had been officiated fairly.

Amprodude wrote: »

Not sure what game you were watching? Cork were denied victory the first day out by a dodgy referee. The 2nd day out Clare got 3 goals in the first half and they still struggled to put Cork away until the end. There was no they beat them well. Clare got a goal in the last min to ensure victory but they were by no means over the line until Honan got the 5th goal. Clare no where to be seen after that All Ireland so that was a fluke for them.

You guys are the first 2 Cork supporters I ever met that really feel cheated out of that All Ireland. Clare were better over the two days. No one less than Jimmy Barry Murphy said that. Id say he wpuld have been embarrassed if Clare hadnt leveled the first day.tradition and Corks best player Harnedy kept ye in it. Harnedy is fantastic. If he was with another county hed have a few All Irelands by now. Clare struggled to put you guys away and that's been a failing of theirs against Cork many times since. Last Saturday was another example. I think championship time will tell a tale.

puzl wrote: »

Anyway, back on topic. Cork need to win this year to keep their barren spell record and their at least one all Ireland a decade since 1890s.

I think they have a chance if they find 2-3 subs that can see them over the line in a tight game. They were the better team against limerick last year when comparing starting 15s. The limerick subs made a huge difference and turned the game completely upside down. When I saw harnedy limping out to start extra time I knew it was over.

This year they seem to be using the league to search for subs but I'm not sure there's going to be crazy competition for starting spots like you'll have in tipp, limerick, Kilkenny or Waterford, for example.

I wouldn't bet on them pulling it off this year, but I wouldn't be shocked if they did it. If they don't do it this year and can build a solid panel over the next 14 months then I think they'll be serious contenders.

Cork were 6 points up with 7 to play v limerick in the semi and were the better team up to that point even if limerick missed at least 2 gilt edge goal chances but the game is over 70-75 minutes comparing first 15s isn't relative really is it as how many all ireland finals are won with only 15 players?
Nevertheless i agree with your viewpoints on cork this yr I think they'll be v close getting out of munster could be the most difficult part of the equation i think Alan cadogan and Robbie o Flynn will be as good as anyone to bring on though for me cadogan has to start, if they don't win it this yr there'll be a lot of lads on the team next yr with even more mileage

With regard to the 2013 final, it’s hard to believe people still haven’t figured out the whole ‘at least’ part of the injury time rule in GAA games. Or maybe they have but ignore it in favour of a good whinge.

The key element of this issue is the fact that injuries/delays do NOT occur in precise 60 second chunks. Or do people think that GAA players are just so considerate to the referee and his timekeeping they have their injuries fine-tuned to last precisely 1 minute, 2 minutes, 3 minutes, etc.?

As a result, when 70 minutes are approaching and the ref realises there are 2 minutes 40 seconds extra to be played, but knows the board that’s held up to signify the extra time only shows minutes but not seconds - what does he do?

He can’t signal 3 minutes, because there weren’t 3 minutes of delays! That would be adding on time for something that didn’t exist. The only alternative is to signal 2 minutes and because it’s in the rules, those with functioning brains know that the 2 minutes = AT LEAST 2 minutes to cover the fact that in all likelihood the delays didn’t actually come to precisely 2 minutes, but were somewhere between 2 and 3.

It’s a very straight-forward concept, but….